Most who are financially capable of international travel also own a tv and have had a misfortune of seeing at least one bad american police series or a movie. Or something like that.
Though not everyone will pick up such trivial knowledge, lots non-american people do know of 911.
There's really no need to go anywhere near the orbit of mercury (yet, maybe in a n+1 years), small spots of Moon covered with solar panels and microwave beams to here would cover all our energy needs for a loooong time.
Guess which has been around longer? Of course, every time when something is similar, Apple zealots pop out of vacuum and starts yelling about they being ripped of, even though it has been done for years because anyone even DREAMED about Darwin.
Well, the UTF-8 virtual terminals of RH8 & 9 were really rather flakey, maybe it's better to have a more primitive system working properly than half-baked kludge.
I've got hard time believing they took jump all the way back to ASCII. Seems rather overly harsh, though. If it doesn't have even ISO-8859-x support (which, unlike UTF, has been working on console for years), that's bad, but probably (I hope) that's just an error in release notes...
this is an unstable branch by definition (the 'proving grounds' for RedHat's commercial offerings)
It may be proving grounds, but so was RedHat Linux, with well-known rather flaky ".0" releases and all. It still doesn't make it "unstable branch", or unsuitable for real work. Desktop OS's are always more unstable than enterprise server editions with their absurd requirements.
and its goals do not include creating an OS you can use for real work.
Wrong. Above the "things you can do" the goal is quite clearly stated, and seems very much geared towards usable system:
The goal of The Fedora Project is to work with the Linux community to build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open source software.
Objectives page also states:
1. Create a complete general-purpose operating system with capabilities equivalent to competing operating systems, built for and by a community
10. Produce robust releases approximately 2-3 times per year
Those sound quite much geared towards usable, not unstable beta branch, in addition they share a lot with goals that Debian project has and you don't seem to have any troubles with it, why is it so bad when someone else does the same?
I agree that it has some problems, the rather short errata support being most serious, but that can be fixed if the legacy project takes fire.
RedHat has been running on losses for almost all of their existence, last year was the first time they made ANY profits at all ($305000, WOW, that's a lot - no wait, it isn't), and instantly ENVIOUS PRICKS like you are whining that they should give it all away.
These aren't people driving five Ferraris and living in fully automated houses, they barely make it even for godssake.
And yes, public companies NEED money, their shareholders demand it and if they can't make it, then it's game over.
This can actually work quite well, and would provide both high thrust and high efficiency, and allow us to put completely insane amounts of material into orbit.
Insane is just the right term for going into ORBIT with nuclear bomb, propulsion.
Orion tech is all fine and dandy for going far and fast but let's just concentrate on using it outside of the atmosphere, and find a bit more friendly way to get into orbit, no?
But in 20 years we could probably send something to the nearest stars in 50 years. In 40 years perhaps it will only take 25 to travel -- thus we should wait 40 years before launching to arrive first:)
New technology doesn't just materialize into existence out of nothing, most of the time it's evolution of older designs.
If you don't do anything now, you don't have anything to develop into that faster craft in 40 years.
Sure dude, We'll just drive the repair truck out to the site and slap on a newer larger transmitter? It's 8.5 billion fucking miles away, how exactly do you propose making a larger transmitter for the thing and getting it ther? Oh wait...the robotic arm and onboard smelter, and onboard chip fabricator?
Since you're obviously too fucking stupid to understand, he's talking about earthbound transmitter. Pioneer's having trouble receiving? Can't build bigger receiver since it's 8.5 billion miles away? No prob, just build a bigger transmitter HERE with more power.
Of course that's still not too easy or (especially) too cheap.
Oh and the receiver item....Sure, since we use the Deep Space Antenna grid to field communications for this thing, I'm sure we'll just throw a few more antennas into space. Anybody got a slingshot nearby?
And as mentioned, Deep Space Antenna grid is very much down on Earth. It's name comes from what it is listening, not from location.
And ironically, this numbnut is trying to paint someone as stupid while his own mental prowess seems QUITE pathetic. Way to go, maybe you'll need to be looking at that mirror and wondering who was it again is causing that outsourcing.
Good riddance, we've got enough people with nuclear phobia already.
It would already be possible for anyone to obtain weakly radioactive material and encase it with thermal gradient generators, resulting in a primitive battery similar in princible to what these probes contain (not enough to power iPod while being reasonably sized- and weighted, but still), they are not reactors.... so, where are you going?
That could certainly be done, but you wouldn't get useful amounts of power from landbound RTG.
Those probes run on very little juice, need to stay working for a LONG time and have perfect working conditions for generating electricity from thermal gradient (near absolute zero on the outside).
It would be much better to use the waste in breeder reactors, except that can't be done due to the "green" nuts and nu-cu-lar weapons paranoid.
That's 62 bytes/sec per server subscribed, if you average it out.
Sorry, but you can't "average it out". Peak is what matters.
If you put out an update, everyone will be getting it the next morning drowning shitload of bandwidth, and you can't use the "62 bytes/sec" that wasn't used yesterday.
Well in that case it's hardly a "personal version" replacement, is it?
The beta, codenamed Severn obviously isn't replacement to anything, it's beta. Nor is it meant to be so any more than were the earlier Red Hat Linux beta versions.
Fedora Core, starting with version 1/Cambridge, whenever it comes out, is the "personal version" replacement.
Most people, most sysadmins even, aren't kernel hackers. They want their personal system to be reasonably stable. I don't mind running Debian Testing, but I'm very selective about what I accept from unstable.
What on Earth makes you think they'll only be releasing "unstable" beta versions of Fedora Core?
It may have basis in NYT story, but it is so heavily distorted beyond regognization it might just as well be new.
Here's somewhat accurate title: "Microsoft interested in Google, Google declines."
As for the summary, it's just as or even more far off and should go something like "Microsoft recently approached Google to offer partnership or even merge, but Google was not interested, and would rather go public.". Slashdot and the submitter turn the story upside down, with little resemblance of anything mentioned in original.
O3 absorbs UV (amount of which is not in any way increased by solar flares) so it won't help you any more than CO2 does. Both are good at blocking large particles like protons, both are rather lousy at blocking very high-energy photons like gamma, and neither will do ANYTHING at all against magnetic fields that are the cause of major problems.
You can't block these pop-ups by shutting down ports, because Windows Messenger Service shares some ports with other useful services.
Only if you consider having your file/printer sharing open to the whole internet to be "useful services". They may be useful in a LAN, but even the most primitive firewall should have a way to separate those.
No to mention bazillions of worms also using these very same ports, including but not limited to the RPC nasties.
Block away, these should not be open to the world under any circumstances!
In particular, is it also intended to work on PowerPC?
Anaconda is written in Python, so it will probably work or at least will be rather easy to tweak to work on just about every platform that the language does.
I think that the idea of artificially enhancing ourselves with technology is the right approach, but the BORG technique of implanting high-tech computerized devices seems the wrong approach. Basically, this would open up our very bodies to hackers.
How about this very simple approach: don't make them (easily) acceccible to the outside world.
If the only way to hack your liver is to plug a cable into it, or first get trough your brain that is actually controlling that liver nobody is going to hack it.
If you lose an arm, use nanotechnology to put on a new arm.
And what makes you think nanobots can not be hacked and reprogrammed to destroy your liver instead of attaching arm just as (or more, since they do require some sort of wireless connection) easily as macroscale augmentations can?
MUD's are SO far ahead graphical hack&slash "RPG"s it's not even funny.
How about a sliding scale for each creature and the gap between levels remain the same? Kill 50 kobolds for let's say 35XP each and the 51st only gets you 15XP.
BatMud, the one I used to play before doomed into a laggy ISP from hell, for example just recently implemented something very much like you're describing, though it's much more steep and not quite permanent, kill 50 goblins and you gain 0xp from them, but it'll slowly come back up again so after a few weeks they are worth something.
This would drive players around the maps better in search of new experiences/creatures.
Further, I would like to see more XP awarded for non-killing actions.
At the same time, they hit another nail to a head and combined the resulting exploration from aforementioned to no-combat XP, that is, you gain experience from exploring the game world. And quite a lot for it, especially for newbie players, you really don't need to kill any rats at all, you can probably get to mid levels of game by just walking around and finding new rooms.
They also have a concept of "level quests", so if the level xyz requires 1000000 xp, you can instead do a quest (which can be bashing, but can just as well be puzzles or "tricks and traps") and that experience requirement is instantly halved as a reward. And if it is bashing, it WILL be hard enough to require you to cooperate with another players.
Class and skill systems are also very sophisticated and not very strongly related to levels.
Of course it's also free, and players can become wizards, even without getting to umpteenth level, if you've got coding or storystelling skills and want to help create new content or otherwise make the game better, go for it.
And all of this is from relatively combat-oriented world... anyone liking what whas described and not having curse of "me want shiny 3d graphics" head to www.bat.org
BTW, why is it that Apple marketing claims the G5 is more powerful than a Pentium4? Both can do two floating point add-multiply ops per clock.
Because that's what marketing does? Mighty fine marketing it would be to be yell that OUR CPU IS SLOWER THAN COMPETITORS! It's not like Intel marketing isn't doing the same, and AMD, and...
Besides for the vast majority of people buying G5, those "lot of other issues" do make a huge difference, and indeed make G5 faster than P4 in many things. And marketing is obviously aimed at the biggest market, not rare minority that cares anything at all about add-multiply speed.
The korean implementation may require IR, but there's a washing mashine downstairs I can call into and get billed either straight from a bank account or in the phone bill, no technical requirements for a phone whatsoever.
Slashdot Mirror
Most who are financially capable of international travel also own a tv and have had a misfortune of seeing at least one bad american police series or a movie. Or something like that.
Though not everyone will pick up such trivial knowledge, lots non-american people do know of 911.
There's really no need to go anywhere near the orbit of mercury (yet, maybe in a n+1 years), small spots of Moon covered with solar panels and microwave beams to here would cover all our energy needs for a loooong time.
Hmm. What does it remind me of indeed?
Guess which has been around longer? Of course, every time when something is similar, Apple zealots pop out of vacuum and starts yelling about they being ripped of, even though it has been done for years because anyone even DREAMED about Darwin.
Well, the UTF-8 virtual terminals of RH8 & 9 were really rather flakey, maybe it's better to have a more primitive system working properly than half-baked kludge.
I've got hard time believing they took jump all the way back to ASCII. Seems rather overly harsh, though. If it doesn't have even ISO-8859-x support (which, unlike UTF, has been working on console for years), that's bad, but probably (I hope) that's just an error in release notes...
this is an unstable branch by definition (the 'proving grounds' for RedHat's commercial offerings)
It may be proving grounds, but so was RedHat Linux, with well-known rather flaky ".0" releases and all. It still doesn't make it "unstable branch", or unsuitable for real work. Desktop OS's are always more unstable than enterprise server editions with their absurd requirements.
and its goals do not include creating an OS you can use for real work.
Wrong. Above the "things you can do" the goal is quite clearly stated, and seems very much geared towards usable system:
The goal of The Fedora Project is to work with the Linux community to build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open source software.
Objectives page also states:
1. Create a complete general-purpose operating system with capabilities equivalent to competing operating systems, built for and by a community
10. Produce robust releases approximately 2-3 times per year
Those sound quite much geared towards usable, not unstable beta branch, in addition they share a lot with goals that Debian project has and you don't seem to have any troubles with it, why is it so bad when someone else does the same?
I agree that it has some problems, the rather short errata support being most serious, but that can be fixed if the legacy project takes fire.
RedHat has been running on losses for almost all of their existence, last year was the first time they made ANY profits at all ($305000, WOW, that's a lot - no wait, it isn't), and instantly ENVIOUS PRICKS like you are whining that they should give it all away.
These aren't people driving five Ferraris and living in fully automated houses, they barely make it even for godssake.
And yes, public companies NEED money, their shareholders demand it and if they can't make it, then it's game over.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
What promise you think they've taken back?
They've NEVER promised to keep supporting your old 7.0 box FOREVER, which seems to be what you're expecting.
How does that explain dark matter? Assuming those shells are built from ordinary matter, they don't increase gravity a bit.
Or are you hinting that there is actually 90% more stars in universe but we can't see any trace of them because they are encased?
What's your definition of a very long time?
With constant acceleration of no more than 1 g, you would reach 10% of speed of light in bit over month.
Of course, sustaining 1 g for a month would require a humongous pile of nuclear bombs...
This can actually work quite well, and would provide both high thrust and high efficiency, and allow us to put completely insane amounts of material into orbit.
Insane is just the right term for going into ORBIT with nuclear bomb, propulsion.
Orion tech is all fine and dandy for going far and fast but let's just concentrate on using it outside of the atmosphere, and find a bit more friendly way to get into orbit, no?
But in 20 years we could probably send something to the nearest stars in 50 years. In 40 years perhaps it will only take 25 to travel -- thus we should wait 40 years before launching to arrive first :)
New technology doesn't just materialize into existence out of nothing, most of the time it's evolution of older designs.
If you don't do anything now, you don't have anything to develop into that faster craft in 40 years.
Sure dude,
We'll just drive the repair truck out to the site and slap on a newer larger transmitter? It's 8.5 billion fucking miles away, how exactly do you propose making a larger transmitter for the thing and getting it ther? Oh wait...the robotic arm and onboard smelter, and onboard chip fabricator?
Since you're obviously too fucking stupid to understand, he's talking about earthbound transmitter. Pioneer's having trouble receiving? Can't build bigger receiver since it's 8.5 billion miles away? No prob, just build a bigger transmitter HERE with more power.
Of course that's still not too easy or (especially) too cheap.
Oh and the receiver item....Sure, since we use the Deep Space Antenna grid to field communications for this thing, I'm sure we'll just throw a few more antennas into space. Anybody got a slingshot nearby?
And as mentioned, Deep Space Antenna grid is very much down on Earth. It's name comes from what it is listening, not from location.
And ironically, this numbnut is trying to paint someone as stupid while his own mental prowess seems QUITE pathetic. Way to go, maybe you'll need to be looking at that mirror and wondering who was it again is causing that outsourcing.
Good riddance, we've got enough people with nuclear phobia already.
It would already be possible for anyone to obtain weakly radioactive material and encase it with thermal gradient generators, resulting in a primitive battery similar in princible to what these probes contain (not enough to power iPod while being reasonably sized- and weighted, but still), they are not reactors.... so, where are you going?
That could certainly be done, but you wouldn't get useful amounts of power from landbound RTG.
Those probes run on very little juice, need to stay working for a LONG time and have perfect working conditions for generating electricity from thermal gradient (near absolute zero on the outside).
It would be much better to use the waste in breeder reactors, except that can't be done due to the "green" nuts and nu-cu-lar weapons paranoid.
That's 62 bytes/sec per server subscribed, if you average it out.
Sorry, but you can't "average it out". Peak is what matters.
If you put out an update, everyone will be getting it the next morning drowning shitload of bandwidth, and you can't use the "62 bytes/sec" that wasn't used yesterday.
Well in that case it's hardly a "personal version" replacement, is it?
The beta, codenamed Severn obviously isn't replacement to anything, it's beta. Nor is it meant to be so any more than were the earlier Red Hat Linux beta versions.
Fedora Core, starting with version 1/Cambridge, whenever it comes out, is the "personal version" replacement.
Most people, most sysadmins even, aren't kernel hackers. They want their personal system to be reasonably stable. I don't mind running Debian Testing, but I'm very selective about what I accept from unstable.
What on Earth makes you think they'll only be releasing "unstable" beta versions of Fedora Core?
Of course, that last person probably didn't do it where humans evolved (Africa) nor did he have much of a knowledge about edible plants, right?
Relevancy: somewhere around 0%.
Yes, he DID make this story up.
It may have basis in NYT story, but it is so heavily distorted beyond regognization it might just as well be new.
Here's somewhat accurate title: "Microsoft interested in Google, Google declines."
As for the summary, it's just as or even more far off and should go something like "Microsoft recently approached Google to offer partnership or even merge, but Google was not interested, and would rather go public.". Slashdot and the submitter turn the story upside down, with little resemblance of anything mentioned in original.
O3 absorbs UV (amount of which is not in any way increased by solar flares) so it won't help you any more than CO2 does. Both are good at blocking large particles like protons, both are rather lousy at blocking very high-energy photons like gamma, and neither will do ANYTHING at all against magnetic fields that are the cause of major problems.
Just to let you know.
You can't block these pop-ups by shutting down ports, because Windows Messenger Service shares some ports with other useful services.
Only if you consider having your file/printer sharing open to the whole internet to be "useful services". They may be useful in a LAN, but even the most primitive firewall should have a way to separate those.
No to mention bazillions of worms also using these very same ports, including but not limited to the RPC nasties.
Block away, these should not be open to the world under any circumstances!
In particular, is it also intended to work on PowerPC?
Anaconda is written in Python, so it will probably work or at least will be rather easy to tweak to work on just about every platform that the language does.
I think that the idea of artificially enhancing ourselves with technology is the right approach, but the BORG technique of implanting high-tech computerized devices seems the wrong approach. Basically, this would open up our very bodies to hackers.
How about this very simple approach: don't make them (easily) acceccible to the outside world.
If the only way to hack your liver is to plug a cable into it, or first get trough your brain that is actually controlling that liver nobody is going to hack it.
If you lose an arm, use nanotechnology to put on a new arm.
And what makes you think nanobots can not be hacked and reprogrammed to destroy your liver instead of attaching arm just as (or more, since they do require some sort of wireless connection) easily as macroscale augmentations can?
MUD's are SO far ahead graphical hack&slash "RPG"s it's not even funny.
How about a sliding scale for each creature and the gap between levels remain the same? Kill 50 kobolds for let's say 35XP each and the 51st only gets you 15XP.
BatMud, the one I used to play before doomed into a laggy ISP from hell, for example just recently implemented something very much like you're describing, though it's much more steep and not quite permanent, kill 50 goblins and you gain 0xp from them, but it'll slowly come back up again so after a few weeks they are worth something.
This would drive players around the maps better in search of new experiences/creatures.
Further, I would like to see more XP awarded for non-killing actions.
At the same time, they hit another nail to a head and combined the resulting exploration from aforementioned to no-combat XP, that is, you gain experience from exploring the game world. And quite a lot for it, especially for newbie players, you really don't need to kill any rats at all, you can probably get to mid levels of game by just walking around and finding new rooms.
They also have a concept of "level quests", so if the level xyz requires 1000000 xp, you can instead do a quest (which can be bashing, but can just as well be puzzles or "tricks and traps") and that experience requirement is instantly halved as a reward. And if it is bashing, it WILL be hard enough to require you to cooperate with another players.
Class and skill systems are also very sophisticated and not very strongly related to levels.
Of course it's also free, and players can become wizards, even without getting to umpteenth level, if you've got coding or storystelling skills and want to help create new content or otherwise make the game better, go for it.
And all of this is from relatively combat-oriented world... anyone liking what whas described and not having curse of "me want shiny 3d graphics" head to www.bat.org
BTW, why is it that Apple marketing claims the G5 is more powerful than a Pentium4? Both can do two floating point add-multiply ops per clock.
Because that's what marketing does? Mighty fine marketing it would be to be yell that OUR CPU IS SLOWER THAN COMPETITORS! It's not like Intel marketing isn't doing the same, and AMD, and...
Besides for the vast majority of people buying G5, those "lot of other issues" do make a huge difference, and indeed make G5 faster than P4 in many things. And marketing is obviously aimed at the biggest market, not rare minority that cares anything at all about add-multiply speed.
The korean implementation may require IR, but there's a washing mashine downstairs I can call into and get billed either straight from a bank account or in the phone bill, no technical requirements for a phone whatsoever.